National Bank v. Shaw

Citations

• 218 Pa. 612
• 67 A. 875
• 1907 Pa. LEXIS 584

Syllabus

<p>Promissory notes — Evidence—Parol agreement — Written contemporary agreement.</p> <p>Where at the time a promissory note was given to a bank, a contemporary oral agreement subsequently put in writing was entered into between the bank and the maker of the note, by which the latter was in express terms relieved from all individual liability on the note, and the agreement provided the sole source from which payment was to be made, and it also appears that the giving of the note was a mere device to avoid trouble with the bank examiner, and the comptroller of the treasury, the maker cannot be held liable for the payment of the note.</p> <p>Contract — Written agreement — Parol agreement — Evidence.</p> <p>Where the officials of a bank prepare a -written agreement which is submitted to the directors and approved by them without any question being raised as to omissions in the writing, and the contract is then submitted to and executed by the other party, the evidence of the directors taken in litigation several years after to the effect that there were material omissions in the writing, which evidence is contradicted by the other party, is not such clear, precise and indubitable proof as will justify a reformation of the instrument, and it is error to submit it to a jury.</p>